While technology is moving at breakneck speeds, maybe governments have to find a way to contain unwanted outcomes, writes a reader.
While technology is moving at breakneck speeds, maybe governments have to find a way to contain unwanted outcomes, writes a reader.
Letters to the Editor
Letter of the week
Climate change considerations
Science reporter Jamie Morton’s article “Marine heatwave in El Nino a surprise” should shake us all up to the urgency of the need for dramatic climate change mitigation measures.
If Ben Noll, our Niwa forecaster, is surprised at the 1C to 2C aboveaverage sea temperatures, then may I suggest we should be alarmed.
Later in the article Dr Eric Behrens states New Zealand waters are warming at twice to three times the global rate, and that to accurately define ecological impacts, more research is needed.
We also need research into how we get our political leaders to take effective climate change mitigation measures.
Dennis Worley, Birkenhead.
Getting rid of the rubbish
On Jim Smithson’s letter regarding rubbish bins being removed. On a recent trip to Japan, we found that there were NO public rubbish bins and people were required to take their rubbish home.
Strangely there was no rubbish to be seen in public, so it can be done...
We New Zealanders need to lift our game.
Vivien Dryden, Ōrewa.
Paula’s politics
Paula Bennett (HoS, January 7) is always good for a giggle. First, she ascribes Trump-like behaviour to the political left, as if the abuse Dame Jacinda Ardern suffered came from Labour voters, and then bemoans her experience of finding no one “capable of having an interesting rational discussion”. That, of course, is just a matter of her picking better quality company.
However, she hadn’t finished with that. She went on to say that voters on the left criticised National MPs who were brought up by the welfare state, who supported policies aimed at cutting help to the most vulnerable people in New Zealand. But there have always been people aiding and supporting their oppressors. This comes as no surprise to those on the left who also couldn’t care less about the views of any Rangitata MP. Perhaps Bennett is feeling guilty about her own voting history.
Mark Nixon, Remuera.
Tesla AI Day reveals a humanoid robot dubbed Optimus 30 September 2022 at Tesla HQ in Palo Alto, California
picture supplied still from video
V.M. Ferguson, (Letters, January 6) mentions Ireland’s successful citizens’ assemblies; they helped to resolve the abortion question and called for referendums to be multi-optional.
In 1894, New Zealand was the world’s first country to have a multi-option referendum, whileChina used multi-option voting in governance: when debating war or peace with Mongolia, they voted 5:46:33 in a three-option ballot on “attack”, “defend” or “alternate between the two”.
Today, in the US, with FPTP elections, a two-party structure, and majority voting, Donald Trump is only the denouement of its binary politics. It would be a tremendous fillip if New Zealand (and/or Ireland), both with PR, were to replace the 2500-year-old binary vote with the preferential points system for decision-making. Developed in 1770 by Jean-Charles de Borda, at best, from say six options (in a six-party parliament), today’s Modified Borda Count MBC can identify the option with the highest average preference. The system is literally inclusive, very accurate, and non-majoritarian, so could be the basis of an all-party, power-sharing governance.
In these days of Covid and climate change, such cooperation is essential, if not existential. It’s time for a citizens’ assembly on governance.
Peter Emerson, The de Borda Institute, Belfast.
AI alarm bells
Listening to how the younger generations react to debates about the implementation of AI is quite sobering. Some don’t care or understand the near infinitely spreading self-propelling and independently generating results of AI, whilst others can sense their own future being shortened. There is documented evidence of great technological benefits and how AI can help prevent collisions and unwanted outcomes. However, once a “robotised being” starts to instruct another robotised entity, one should get alarmed.
Just like the many present wars, we may not be able to switch off or reverse any of the started actions. One could probably compare AI with unmanned drones, where the instructors are invisible, yet capable of unstoppable destruction - and who will then be held accountable? While technology is moving at breakneck speeds, maybe governments have to find a way to contain unwanted outcomes. So far, our government has not got an action plan for when the inevitable happens.
